Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

I am continuing to use this technique and like it more and more, but it demands a very equal temperament otherwise there is no “best” pitch for the note being tuned. But then when everything is right, well, then everything is right! (Sometimes I think that it is not that my glass half empty, it is that I don’t have a glass at all.)

I have no plans on trying the CHAS tuning, preparatory or otherwise, or any other tuning with a four letter abbreviation. And sorry, I do not have any recording equipment and probably would not bother if I did.

It is not difficult to make the tool to reach a 12th and then you can find out for yourself what you hear. I think there is much to be said for playing more than two notes at a time when tuning.

_________________________
Jeff DeutschlePart-Time TunerWho taught the first chicken how to peck?

..."I am continuing to use this technique and like it more and more, but it demands a very equal temperament otherwise there is no “best” pitch for the note being tuned."...

Well, why don't you tell us more about your technique?

..."But then when everything is right, well, then everything is right! (Sometimes I think that it is not that my glass half empty, it is that I don’t have a glass at all.)"...

When can we (aural tuners) say "everything is right"? What do you mean?

..."I have no plans on trying the CHAS tuning, preparatory or otherwise, or any other tuning with a four letter abbreviation."...

This is too bad, tough you'll certainly have your reasons.

..."And sorry, I do not have any recording equipment and probably would not bother if I did."...

Why would you not bother? You see, at some point pro aural tuners check their overall tunings and then, with actual results, we can contribute. More than words and more words, for sharing what we are talking about, it could be enough listening to a sequence of chromatic 5ths, 6ths and 10ths, 12ths, 15ths, 17ths and 19ths from C2 to C7 played slowly (4 regular secs each) and with the same energy (read touch).

Also leaving RBIs progression aside, you surely know, 5ths and 12ths are easly checkable by ear, both musically and beat wise. Tune your piano, play it for one hour, or leave it season for three days and check it again. Then you may appreciate why I talk about a Preparatory Tuning.

There is nothing more that I can explain. A string can be tuned to a beat rate when playing two notes and the beat rate can be compared to other beat rates or to a clock. But when playing three notes there is much more to hear. Could you really explain the difference in taste between yellow and brown mustard? I couldn't. I am moving beyond mere theory, even though it is still fascinating to me, and tuning for the best ….. tone? resonance? fahrvergnügen? So if you are interested, go ahead and try it. I can not explain it further, and am still working on it anyway.

Something I do notice is that the more equal the temperament is, the more stretch you can get away with. And this technique does show up any small errors in the temperament.

As far as preparatory tuning, if the tuning sounds different in a few days, how could someone possibly know how to tune a few days earlier so that it will sound a certain way a few days later? It sounds like snake oil to me. Until a piano is stable the tuning will change in ways that cannot be completely predicted.

_________________________
Jeff DeutschlePart-Time TunerWho taught the first chicken how to peck?

..."I can not explain it further, and am still working on it anyway."...

Nevermind, do work on it and let us know your findings.

..."Something I do notice is that the more equal the temperament is, the more stretch you can get away with."...

Sorry, what do you mean?

..."And this technique does show up any small errors in the temperament."...

More than usual?

..."As far as preparatory tuning, if the tuning sounds different in a few days, how could someone possibly know how to tune a few days earlier so that it will sound a certain way a few days later?"...

Exactly, we should avoid that our tuning may sound different in a few days. This is what the Preparatory Tuning is about: taking into account the piano settlings, gaining the tuning form through the piano settlings.

..."It sounds like snake oil to me. Until a piano is stable the tuning will change in ways that cannot be completely predicted.".

You are right, predicting is quite a challenge. Though we know for sure that the piano will settle, therefore our tuning form is bound to be "de-formed".

Then we can guess the tuning "over-form" and let the piano settle on our favorite form.

After all, archers can evaluate winds, speed, distances, although not "completely".

And we tuners do not need to wait for a few days, we can solidly play the piano while we are tuning it. Correct?

The impossibility of predicting how a piano’s tuning will settle after a few days (and therefore the futility of tuning in a way to produce a later desired tuning) is pointed out as snake oil. Then the “few days later” is changed to typical pin setting technique, a shell game tactic.

_________________________
Jeff DeutschlePart-Time TunerWho taught the first chicken how to peck?

Thank you, Kees, for suggesting me to listen to Sweelinck's chromatic fantasia. I went on youtube and I listened to three versions.

I agree with you, those tuning have strong melodic effects. I do not feel like raising an aesthetic issue, so what follows is only some of my personal thinking.

While I can understand the route through many temperaments toward modern ET's, for achieving the playability of all key signatures first and maximum euphonicity later, I cannot be sure those sounds and their harmonic and melodic relations are what the composer really had in his mind (I can not even be sure how correct those MT tuning are).

As I said, I tend to believe we may have a natural harmonic heritage which may be referred to matter and its vibrating modes. Then, I tend to believe that composers manage to transfer on paper their inner singing, and that in those times (1600) they had to get along with what had been achieved, the overall understandings and the available “modernities”.

Today we still understand iH as the reason for stretched tuning curves. My hope is now to share Chas Temperamental Theory, its latest ET modulus and the system's constants, that release the most correct* reason for stretching all intervals.

As I think we may all enjoy scientific progress, I also think we are ready for this to happen. Actually, it is my opinion that, as in many cases, our practice has anticipated theory.

Then it may only be a matter of dismissing wrong teachings and wizard's frocks, and letting emotional and rational get along together.

..."ET often turns closer to UT at those ends too! In the extremes, it's just what brings out the best resonance - personally I couldn't care less if it works out mathematically."...

..."The only reason I can think of right now is that the symmetry of ET makes it's easier for me to approach it from an analytical viewpoint. Tuning EBVT III, I tend to listen for harmony. That makes it much harder - again, for me."...

Originally Posted By: Emmery,The practical application of ET removes offensiveness at the slight expense of colour.

Patrick:..."I don't agree on either "offensiveness" or "slight expense". It removes key color totally, turning the tunings it into something very similar to grayscale. Which has a certain beauty to it that I like, too."...

Originally Posted By: Emmery,The other temperaments including EBVT can gain some colour, but with a proporional loss of freedom in playing in all keys or introducing unwanted dissonance . For EBVT to gain universal acceptance in the public, somehow the public needs to be convinced that freedom to express music in ALL keys with the least offensiveness is less important than the more colourful expression of some music played in specific keys. I doubt this will fly mainstream on home based piano tunings for piano technicians and will probably remain in the confines of some performance halls or exhibitions on alternative temperaments.

Patrick:..."the public doesn't have to sign any UT declarations at all. I don't think they could care less - as long as they are moved by the music coming out of the piano, be it whatever logic behind the tuning. This is often neglected in this forum. We tune for the pianos to be played, not to be calculated."

I still cannot understand this thing about "colour", nor why we should lessen (on purpose) the harmoniousness of any chord. What can the reason or the pleasure be in going from a lambish key to a wolfish one?

Does a pianist or a composer really think in terms of variable harmoniousness? And if he/she really did, could their personal preferences ever be said objective, ever be shareable?

How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a chord that could sound better in tune?

Can a musician ever be vexed when he/she finds that all key-signatures sound absolutelly beautyfull? When all key-signatures, like in my experience, can readly and generously give back all their harmonic potential?

I don't know about you (All), when I tune I do not think "grey" at all, actually when a chord, any chord is in tune I can hear an astonishing amount of partials coming out, which in my feeling make up the whole available colours. Then, by adding more sounds, I can play with colours. And it will be playing in the warmest place, safe as beauty, immaculate as a shore-line can be.

[...] What can the reason or the pleasure be in going from a lambish key to a wolfish one? [...]

EBVT III is much, much, much more subtle than what you are trying to imply here.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

[...] How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a chord that could sound better in tune? [...]

My experience playing it on my own piano, and listening to the recordings of Grandpianoman, Patrick Wingren, and others who posted recordings, is that EBVT III is perfectly in tune. I've tried to describe it to people by calling it "magnified clarity" or "magnified purity."

Quoted from another thread [bolded italics added for emphasis]:

Originally Posted By: LisztAddict

I am not a pro tuner, but I hope it's okay for me to make one post in here. I use Tunelab and today I got an EBVT file from Kees for my piano. When I loaded the file up and looked at the tuning curve, it's no longer a curve. I said to myself "wow, that looks interesting". Not sure what to expect but I gave it a try. Some notes stay the same as before, a few I had to pull up or drop down a bit. I think the most I had to change with any one note was just about 3 cents. The end result really amazed me. I could not believe that only changing a few notes just a tiny bit could make such a big difference. Anyway, I am very happy with whatever math Kees did to the tuning file I sent him.

Thanks Kees!!!

LisztAddict is a very experienced and sensitive pianist. He liked it! That should tell you something about EBVT III.

"I still cannot understand this thing about "colour", nor why we should lessen (on purpose) the harmoniousness of any chord. What can the reason or the pleasure be in going from a lambish key to a wolfish one?"

I'm referring to Unequal Temperaments (UT) and conceptual (subtle?) reasons for featuring them. As for the rest, how EBVT sounds and why, I have my opinion, and I can understand when you say "EBVT III is perfectly in tune". But this is not the point nor the thread, I would like to discuss about this (subtle?) "colour" thing.

Last posted:

"Does a pianist or a composer really think in terms of variable harmoniousness? And if he/she really did, could their personal preferences ever be said objective, ever be shareable?

How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a chord that could sound better in tune?

Can a musician ever be vexed when he/she finds that all key-signatures sound absolutelly beautyfull? When all key-signatures, like in my experience, can readly and generously give back all their harmonic potential?

I don't know about you (All), when I tune I do not think "grey" at all, actually when a chord, any chord is in tune I can hear an astonishing amount of partials coming out, which in my feeling make up the whole available colours. Then, by adding more sounds, I can play with colours. And it will be playing in the warmest place, safe as beauty, immaculate as a shore-line can be."

I still cannot understand this thing about "colour", nor why we should lessen (on purpose) the harmoniousness of any chord. What can the reason or the pleasure be in going from a lambish key to a wolfish one?

. Alfredo - "Well-tempered Clavier", and the way Bach writes, should give a good example of reason and pleasure for using differently colored keys.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

Does a pianist or a composer really think in terms of variable harmoniousness? And if he/she really did, could their personal preferences ever be said objective, ever be shareable?

All the composers I've worked with - including myself - enjoy the power of intonation. Since we can't do that on the fly on the piano, UT is still (to me) a better choice than ET to carry something of the vocal, strings and wind/brass sound to the piano.

As I write this once more, I notice that I really do look at tuning from a musical angle all the time. Maybe this is a gap that can never bridged (between technical execution and musically desired result), but I hope it could - In playing, as well as in tuning.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a chord that could sound better in tune?

"Better in tune" - would that be ET? I doubt so. All the intervals in ET are compromised, so let's hope that ET is not the single, ultimate "in tune" sound.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

I don't know about you (All), when I tune I do not think "grey" at all, actually when a chord, any chord is in tune I can hear an astonishing amount of partials coming out, which in my feeling make up the whole available colours. Then, by adding more sounds, I can play with colours. And it will be playing in the warmest place, safe as beauty, immaculate as a shore-line can be.

Yes, and I admit that the analogy of gray-scale vs colors has its shortcomings. Color inside keys, yes. Color between keys, no. I wrote about that in the other thread, where you and Bernhard also participated.

Edited by pppat (07/04/1010:57 AM)Edit Reason: added link to thread referred to in last paragraph

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoI still cannot understand this thing about "colour", nor why we should lessen (on purpose) the harmoniousness of any chord. What can the reason or the pleasure be in going from a lambish key to a wolfish one?

Patrick, you reply:..."Alfredo - "Well-tempered Clavier", and the way Bach writes, should give a good example of reason and pleasure for using differently colored keys."...

This is an old, debatable issue. I have heard Bach being played with all sorts of tunings. Have you heard Bach played on Chas? You may then understand me talking about reason and pleasure. But, what is your reason? What is your pleasure? What do you like about going from a lambish key to a wolfish one? Can you explain?

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoDoes a pianist or a composer really think in terms of variable harmoniousness? And if he/she really did, could their personal preferences ever be said objective, ever be shareable?

P:..."All the composers I've worked with - including myself smile - enjoy the power of intonation. Since we can't do that on the fly on the piano, UT is still (to me) a better choice than ET to carry something of the vocal, strings and wind/brass sound to the piano.As I write this once more, I notice that I really do look at tuning from a musical angle all the time. Maybe this is a gap that can never bridged (between technical execution and musically desired result), but I hope it could - In playing, as well as in tuning."...

I hope you look at "in tune" from a musical angle and I should feel no gap. Do you mean ensamble "real time intonation"? If that is bad with a fixed modern ET, which is the most euphonious solution, it is worse (logically) with a fixed UT, plus the vocal UT and the strings UT (all hypothetical), what is that you like? Or perhaps you mean: a fixed UT reminds me of the power(?) of intonation. Then you find again that your piano has not that power "on the fly"...is this what you like?

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoHow is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a chord that could sound better in tune?

P:..."Better in tune" - would that be ET? I doubt so. All the intervals in ET are compromised, so let's hope that ET is not the single, ultimate "in tune" sound."...

ET/compromise may be referred to the historical ET, in Chas ET all intervals are ideally weaven together. As a musician, I should hope that you retain the meaning of "a chord that could sound better in tune".

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoI don't know about you (All), when I tune I do not think "grey" at all, actually when a chord, any chord is in tune I can hear an astonishing amount of partials coming out, which in my feeling make up the whole available colours. Then, by adding more sounds, I can play with colours. And it will be playing in the warmest place, safe as beauty, immaculate as a shore-line can be.

P:..."Yes, and I admit that the analogy of gray-scale vs colors has its shortcomings. Color inside keys, yes. Color between keys, no."...

Thanks, I shall reword my question: How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a sequence of chords that could sound better in tune?And the other question: Can a musician ever be vexed when he/she finds that all key-signatures sound absolutelly beautyfull? When all key-signatures, like in my experience, can readly and generously give back all their harmonic potential?

Hello. I think Bernhard Stopper's description of its own tuning may be usefull eventually.

"I suppose that you can agree that musical intonation preference for melodic perception is proven to be more pythagorean like, especially for the major thirds. I think this is status quo of teaching at music universities, as a lecturer for composition you have probably knowledge about this.

What is the reason for this? In believe that our brain´s neural network has been highly optimized over evolution to reduce redundancy. If we assume that this neural network ignores the fifth partial for musical processing, we can have an explanation why we prefer melodically a more pythagorean third over a harmonically pure third in the musical perception.

In my tuning theory, another musical preception preference has an important role:It has been found, that pure octaves don´t satisfy musical perception either.

If we look closer to the pythagorean major third with it´s ratio of 81/64*, we can split this ratio down to 3^4/2^6, that means musically four pure duodecimes (twelfths) upwards and six pure octaves downwards, which yields our pythagorean third.*(we can leave inharmonicity by side at this moment, in real word piano tunings it´s just a problem of affine transforms.)

If we replace those six pure octaves (as they don´t satisfy melodical/musical perception) with octaves that satisfy this perception (in my tuning that means stretching every octave with a nineteenth of the pythagorean comma), the pythagorean thirds are getting transformed (or corrected) by six acoustic satisfying octaves. These thirds are then slightly greater than in standard ET, but not as extreme as in pythagorean tuning. They are more comfortable melodically than pure thirds and harmonically more comfortable than the pythagorean thirds, (even more comfortable than the thirds in the outer keys of unequal temperaments). Additionally, they have a distinctive musical size which can be explained by and are coherent with a redundancy-optimized neural network. This distinct size can also be trained way easier by soloists compared to up to twelve different sizes in unequal temperaments.

Not to speak about the effect of the specific symmetry in the ET form on pure duodecimes (twelfths), which makes the impression of dissapearing of the beats of the major thirds in chords.

So equal temperament in this special case (based on pure duodecimes aka StopperStimmung) is tonal for me while unequal temperaments (including EBVT´s and standard ET) are atonal.

And i prefer a tonal tuning. (How close we are with this statement :-) .

Let me also mention that my tuning was not developped through an abstract mathematical model. The math is just applied to try to explain what made me (and many many others) so inspired about the musicality of this tuning. Bernhard Stopper".

Bernhard, some time ago you were about to post your aural tuning sequence. Have I missed it?

Patrick, you reply:..."Alfredo - "Well-tempered Clavier", and the way Bach writes, should give a good example of reason and pleasure for using differently colored keys."...

This is an old, debatable issue. I have heard Bach being played with all sorts of tunings. Have you heard Bach played on Chas? You may then understand me talking about reason and pleasure. But, what is your reason? What is your pleasure? What do you like about going from a lambish key to a wolfish one? Can you explain?

No, I haven't heard Bach on CHAS (except for Isaac's Bach/Siloti, which I think sounded really good). But as far as the Well-tempered Clavier, It is really evident that close keys in a WT/UT results in music that are different from the remote keys. You don't really have to listen to any other thing than the springiness of the prelude in C# major and compare it to the calm C major prelude to see what I mean. These characteristics of the keys get lost in ET, no matter which version of ET.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

P:..."All the composers I've worked with - including myself smile - enjoy the power of intonation. Since we can't do that on the fly on the piano, UT is still (to me) a better choice than ET to carry something of the vocal, strings and wind/brass sound to the piano.As I write this once more, I notice that I really do look at tuning from a musical angle all the time. Maybe this is a gap that can never bridged (between technical execution and musically desired result), but I hope it could - In playing, as well as in tuning."...

I hope you look at "in tune" from a musical angle and I should feel no gap. Do you mean ensamble "real time intonation"? If that is bad with a fixed modern ET, which is the most euphonious solution, it is worse (logically) with a fixed UT, plus the vocal UT and the strings UT (all hypothetical), what is that you like? Or perhaps you mean: a fixed UT reminds me of the power(?) of intonation. Then you find again that your piano has not that power "on the fly"...is this what you like?

A fixed modern ET might be the most euphonious solution to you and others, but not to many non-piano musicians. At least in my experience of working with strings, choirs, wind/brass etc. by themselves, the intonation is not ET. Why would it be? I'd love to have the luxury of setting a new tonal center on the fly and deal with the intervals the way they sound best, but this is an impossibility with the piano. So yes, these nuances - the power of intonation - gives a sound that reminds me of a good UT… a temperament where interval sizes (most prominently = the major 3rds) vary from one key to another.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

P:..."Better in tune" - would that be ET? I doubt so. All the intervals in ET are compromised, so let's hope that ET is not the single, ultimate "in tune" sound."...

As a musician, I should hope that you retain the meaning of "a chord that could sound better in tune".

Yes this I do, and it happens almost every time i strike chords in an ET tuning

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

Thanks, I shall reword my question: How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a sequence of chords that could sound better in tune?

Same problem here. You ask me somehing giving facts that I disagree with - how could I answer anything such? Ask a decent question that, at least slightly, leaves the door open for your ideals not being universial, then we could talk about that.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capurso

And the other question: Can a musician ever be vexed when he/she finds that all key-signatures sound absolutelly beautyfull? When all key-signatures, like in my experience, can readly and generously give back all their harmonic potential?

But of course! I know quite a few musicians that wouldn't touch ET with a ten foot pole, when it comes to interpret music written for "colored keys" (like, for example, the WTC)

As i know that you know there exist also this other opinion, i don´t tell you what i call you here

ET was a revolution at Bach´s time and Bach composed WTC to praise this revolutionary achievement by demonstrating how all keys work WELL with this temperament. (Not to speak of the fact that there was no EBVT in sight for him!)

As i know that you know there exist also this other opinion, i don´t tell you what i call you here

You are free to call me what you want, Bernhard, as long as you have the backup for it

Neidhart's thesis that WTC was written for ET doesn't really have that much backup anymore, so it might be wise to drop it. However theoretical one might get, there is always the music itself. Bach composes his WTC in a tension/release fashion between the keys, and I'm sad that you miss that.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

ET was a revolution at Bach´s time and Bach composed WTC to praise this revolutionary achievement by demonstrating how all keys work WELL with this temperament. (Not to speak of the fact that there was no EBVT in sight for him!)

ET was known long before Bach, and rejected as unmusical. Probably because the listener's ears weren't accustomed to the strange sound (all intervals compromised, and duplicated 12 times) we have gotten used to.

I once more refer to the C major prelude and the C# major prelude. In ET, the character of the two preludes transposed to the vice versa key is the same. In a WT/UT, there is a real strength to the compositions that separates them, not only in key or tempo, but in tension.

You say your StopperStimmung is derived from aural tuning practice into theory. That I like! Now, how come (regarding Bach's tuning) you want to force a theory on music that clearly speaks in a language distant to that theory? This makes no sense to me.

Neidhart's thesis that WTC was written for ET doesn't really have that much backup anymore, so it might be wise to drop it.

Sorry i don´t follow you with this. Drop it. I don´t, as i see no evidence for me to do so. I try to explain again why.

Originally Posted By: pppat

However theoretical one might get, there is always the music itself. Bach composes his WTC in a tension/release fashion between the keys, and I'm sad that you miss that.

I simply prefer a clear and beautiful sounding tuning in every key. A slightly stretched tuning the way i am doing does provide that. Remember Glenn Gould recorded WTC in ET (an intuitively stretched ET, done by an extraordinary good tuner.)And i don´t miss any tension/release fashion at all in Glenn Gould`s recordings.

Originally Posted By: pppat

ET was known long before Bach,

Yes, by chinese musicians, but it was not widely known in europe unless Werckmeister introduced it to a broader public here.

Originally Posted By: pppat

and rejected as unmusical.

No, it was highly appreciated when it came up. Again: Bach wrote his WTC to praise the revolutional achievement of it. Bach called his work "Well-tempered clavier" because it was sounding well and musical in all keys.

Remember what i was saying about the musicality of solo intonation, they were measured to be closer to pythagorean intervals than to be pure intervals. Solo intonation is what we hear with the inner ear. If we replace every octave part in pythagorean intervals by an acoustical satisfying octave, we are spot on the ET form i am using, this isn´t compromising at all, it is transforming pythagorean intervals by acoustic satisfying octaves. You are welcome to recognize the relevance concerning melodic musicality of this principle here.

Originally Posted By: pppat

I once more refer to the C major prelude and the C# major prelude. In ET, the character of the two preludes transposed to the vice versa key is the same.In a WT/UT, there is a real strength to the compositions that separates them, not only in key or tempo, but in tension.

The characters are different and remain different, even with a beautiful sounding and well done (stretched accordingly, systematically or by intuition) ET. Unlike in UT, BOTH preludes sound beautiful and musical in ET. I always will prefer melodical musicality and beauty by purity in all keys which is both possible with a musical ET form over stretch/tension from UT, which is probably the only goal to win with UT.

Originally Posted By: pppat

You say your StopperStimmung is derived from aural tuning practice into theory. That I like! Now, how come (regarding Bach's tuning) you want to force a theory on music that clearly speaks in a language distant to that theory? This makes no sense to me.

I see no contradiction at all. ET´s of that time were probably performed with an intuitive amount of stretch to satisfy musicality. I assume that this was done very close to what i am doing and what Bach (and every other musical individual including you) preferred/is preferring with his inner ear on melodical (musical) perception.

Remember how many times in the EBVT III thread here and the AB comparison test in the pianist forum thread, where people who were open minded expected that the better sounding record must be EBVT, and later it turned out that their preference was for ET instead. You are ignoring your own caused facts here, if you keep on claiming that ET is unmusical, i suppose just because you want to be ET to be unmusical.

I see no contradiction at all. ET´s of that time were probably performed with an intuitive amount of stretch to satisfy musicality. I assume that this was done very close to what i am doing and what Bach (and every other musical individual including you) preferred/is preferring with his inner ear on melodical (musical) perception.

ET was not used in Bach's time. Harpsichords and baroque organs do not tolerate it. Very low inharmonicity of the hpschd translates in almost no room to stretch the octave.

Your knowledge of Bach seems to be based on 19th century biographies reflecting more the authors preconceptions than reality. Of course he didn't use ET. No self-respecting early music performer uses ET anymore these days.

On the piano, for which Bach did not write since it did not exist, you can of course do as you please. I prefer UT but ET sounds fine too. As the purpose of playing Bach on the piano is to make it sound good it may be more important to let the piano sound good than to be historical. Of course "good" is a matter of taste.

Neidhart's thesis that WTC was written for ET doesn't really have that much backup anymore, so it might be wise to drop it.

Sorry i don´t follow you with this. Drop it. I don´t, as i see no evidence for me to do so.[...]

Originally Posted By: DoelKees

ET was not used in Bach's time. Harpsichords and baroque organs do not tolerate it. Very low inharmonicity of the hpschd translates in almost no room to stretch the octave.

Your [@Berhnard] knowledge of Bach seems to be based on 19th century biographies reflecting more the authors preconceptions than reality. Of course he didn't use ET. No self-respecting early music performer uses ET anymore these days.

Bernhard, this is exactly why I thought it would be a good thing to drop this theory. I do not know of one single acclaimed music scholar/researcher/theorist today that would claim that Bach used ET. This unfortunate theory somehow gained ground during the advocating of ET, but it is gone by now. Really.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

Originally Posted By: pppat

I once more refer to the C major prelude and the C# major prelude. In ET, the character of the two preludes transposed to the vice versa key is the same.In a WT/UT, there is a real strength to the compositions that separates them, not only in key or tempo, but in tension.

The characters are different and remain different, even with a beautiful sounding and well done (stretched accordingly, systematically or by intuition) ET. Unlike in UT, BOTH preludes sound beautiful and musical in ET. I always will prefer melodical musicality and beauty by purity in all keys which is both possible with a musical ET form over stretch/tension from UT, which is probably the only goal to win with UT.

No, no… The music remains different, but the advantage of the key colors are gone. I really can't find a way to be more clear about this than I have in my earlier postings, and if you can't see/hear/feel this major (sic!) difference, I am truly sorry.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

Remember how many times in the EBVT III thread here and the AB comparison test in the pianist forum thread, where people who were open minded expected that the better sounding record must be EBVT, and later it turned out that their preference was for ET instead. You are ignoring your own caused facts here, if you keep on claiming that ET is unmusical, i suppose just because you want to be ET to be unmusical.

My memory might fail me, but I don't think that I've said that I find ET unmusical? What I'm talking about here is the musical strength of color in the keys.And to be very clear, I do NOT make any claims that EBVT automatically produce a better sounding recording. I find the AB tests fascinating in that sense, because they give feedback without predjudice

I see all of this as a great research, where you, me and others are most needed.

What have been been completely demolished through the AB tests, though, are the claims that remote keys in EBVT are offensive to the ear. If so, there should have been no hesitation on deciding which Clair de Lune (Db flat) was ET and which was EBVT.

So, honestly all - you can't have it both ways. Some argue that EBVT is simultaneously a) offensive in remote keys, b) a quasi-ET that is too close to a truly super-duper perfect ET (which we all of course tune ) to be of any worth. Make up your mind, or keep silent, guys!

(disclaimer: this was not in any way directed towards you personally, Bernhard, I just tried to economize my posts a bit )

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

I apologize if i may not respond, my time is actually very limited.

Thank you for the concern, but there is no need to apologize - we are in no hurry!

...“No, I haven't heard Bach on CHAS (except for Isaac's Bach/Siloti, which I think sounded really good). But as far as the Well-tempered Clavier, It is really evident that close keys in a WT/UT results in music that are different from the remote keys. You don't really have to listen to any other thing than the springiness of the prelude in C# major and compare it to the calm C major prelude to see what I mean. These characteristics of the keys get lost in ET, no matter which version of ET.”...

You say...WT/UT results in music that are different from the remote keys? I would not say “music” but ambient atmospheres, and in modern ET's atmospheres (and emotions) do change within the highest degree of euphonicity. Then, leaving Bach's intentions aside, we could learn from Beethoven and understand, once for all, that the same key-signature can open to any “calmness” and any “springiness”. Is this what you mean when you say “colour”? Really, I do not get your point.

...“A fixed modern ET might be the most euphonious solution to you and others, but not to many non-piano musicians. At least in my experience of working with strings, choirs, wind/brass etc. by themselves, the intonation is not ET. Why would it be?”...

Any theoretical ET, once put into practice, will soon result in a modern quasi-ET (due to ordinary decay). And let's put our discussion into context, you are looking for conceptual contents for featuring UT's but, do you really think that “...others...strings, choirs, wind/brass etc.” have EBVT in their mind? Out of an ideological effort, you seem to refuse modern ET's validity in terms of tuning reference. Anyone would still be able to play with ETD few cents deviations, they would simply be what they are, singular deviations from modern ET.

You ask why should others go for modern ET intonation. That is simply because modern ET sounds absolutely euphonious in all keys. If you ask how can it be so, for what I can explain, it is because our physiology is in line with nature's logarithmic geometry and proportions. And I still do not see how we could agree on a "subjective" template, more than on a "natural" template.

...“I'd love to have the luxury of setting a new tonal center on the fly and deal with the intervals the way they sound best, but this is an impossibility with the piano. So yes, these nuances - the power of intonation - gives a sound that reminds me of a good UT… a temperament where interval sizes (most prominently = the major 3rds) vary from one key to another.”...

Intervals sizes could, should and would variate on the bases of your taste, like intervals sizes could, should and would variate for anyone, on the bases of their "in tune" taste. Can you imagine? That would not even be brown, as Stopper mentioned, it would be black like hell.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoAs a musician, I should hope that you retain the meaning of "a chord that could sound better in tune".

You reply: “Yes this I do, and it happens almost every time i strike chords in an ET tuning.”...

I was not really looking for this kind of answer, since you (admittedly) can not talk about Chas. I was trying to understand: what is the pleasure in going from a dullish to a wolfish key? On this, can you sing? If you can sing, would you say you are “in tune”?

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoThanks, I shall reword my question: How is it possible to refer to "colour" as to the feeling we get from a sequence of chords that could sound better in tune?

You reply: “Same problem here. You ask me somehing giving facts that I disagree with - how could I answer anything such? Ask a decent question that, at least slightly, leaves the door open for your ideals not being universial, then we could talk about that.”...

Actually, I'm saying that some chords may sound well tuned, others may not, and you seem to agree. Anyway, the issue is “color”. My points are: 1. it will not be alternating dullish and wolfish chords the way we can add “color”, nor enhance cadences, unless we admit cacophony. 2. Anyone may prefer its own (color) template, but that would be like hell (referred to ensamble / orchestra). 3. You seem to talk about "color", meaning either your own “in tune” preference or your own “practical tuning” preference. 4. My ideal (Chas) is not universal in that it is just mine, but in that it can be explained as “proportions (read harmony) in nature”.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoAnd the other question: Can a musician ever be vexed when he/she finds that all key-signatures sound absolutelly beautyfull? When all key-signatures, like in my experience, can readly and generously give back all their harmonic potential?

...“But of course! I know quite a few musicians that wouldn't touch ET with a ten foot pole, when it comes to interpret music written for "colored keys" (like, for example, the WTC).”...

Your conclusions about WTC and colored keys have the value of an arbitrary inference and I would really drop this kind of proof. Anyway, you may tell those musicians that now they could enjoy modern ET, not the age-old compromise but a tangible ideal. And I say this out of my pro experiences and only after having made sure that Chas model is shareable, both in scientific and practical terms.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper"I see no contradiction at all. ET´s of that time were probably performed with an intuitive amount of stretch to satisfy musicality. I assume that this was done very close to what i am doing and what Bach (and every other musical individual including you) preferred/is preferring with his inner ear on melodical (musical) perception."

Kees, you reply:..."ET was not used in Bach's time."...

J.S.Bach died in 1750. The first, historical ET (12th root of two) had been formalised about 50 years earlyer. If I were you, Kees, I would explain that statement of yours, possibly in another thread. In any case, Stopper said: "ET´s of that time were probably performed with an intuitive amount of stretch to satisfy musicality." Indeed, even in those times, they had to stretch octaves so, what is relevant here, 12th root of two was simply inadeguate. The other two wrong axioms, pure octaves and a 12 semitones module will have been misleading for any temperament.

..."Harpsichords and baroque organs do not tolerate it. Very low inharmonicity of the hpschd translates in almost no room to stretch the octave."...

I haven't tuned baroque organs yet, but I have tuned Chas ET on harpsychords a good number of times (for concerts), never have I had troubles. You say "...almost no room to stretch octaves", yet it is possible.

..."Of course he (Bach) didn't use ET. No self-respecting early music performer uses ET anymore these days."...

Any reliable poster would not confuse his/her own ideas with real facts. For what I can say, many early music (concert) performers enjoy the use of modern ET.

..."As the purpose of playing Bach on the piano is to make it sound good it may be more important to let the piano sound good than to be historical."...

Playing Bach on the piano may be explainable with more than one purpose, but if the purpose was to make Bach and the piano sound good (professionally) there is no doubt, you have to be able to tune.

..."Of course "good" is a matter of taste."...

Nonsense. You can sing on your own, no matter how "out of tune" you are. But if you sing (and/or play) with others, you have to "sound good". If you are not in tune, many musicians could/would tell you.

Nonsense. You can sing on your own, no matter how "out of tune" you are. But if you sing (and/or play) with others, you have to "sound good". If you are not in tune, many musicians could/would tell you.

Nonsense. You can sing on your own, no matter how "out of tune" you are. But if you sing (and/or play) with others, you have to "sound good". If you are not in tune, many musicians could/would tell you.

You forgot to mention Chas.

Kees

Everyone likes a little ***, but nobody likes a smart ***.

_________________________
Jeff DeutschlePart-Time TunerWho taught the first chicken how to peck?

[Kees]..."Of course he (Bach) didn't use ET. No self-respecting early music performer uses ET anymore these days."...

Any reliable poster would not confuse his/her own ideas with real facts. For what I can say, many early music (concert) performers enjoy the use of modern ET.

Well, Alfredo, maybe where you live. I haven't heard an ET-tuned harpsichord in any high-level early music concert for many, many years.

And, oh, I really think you should stop dissecting paragraphs, (and even sentences!) to make your case. Soon you will be down to single words, and then you can debate almost anything. It won't be in context, though, and that makes your counter-arguments pretty much worthless.

Originally Posted By: alfredo capursoAnd the other question: Can a musician ever be vexed when he/she finds that all key-signatures sound absolutelly beautyfull? When all key-signatures, like in my experience, can readly and generously give back all their harmonic potential?

...“But of course! I know quite a few musicians that wouldn't touch ET with a ten foot pole, when it comes to interpret music written for "colored keys" (like, for example, the WTC).”...

Your conclusions about WTC and colored keys have the value of an arbitrary inference and I would really drop this kind of proof. Anyway, you may tell those musicians that now they could enjoy modern ET, not the age-old compromise but a tangible ideal. And I say this out of my pro experiences and only after having made sure that Chas model is shareable, both in scientific and practical terms.

I do not speak of proof, I just made an observation.

I have a big problem with you referring to ET as 12th root of 2 as the old way, and CHAS as the revelation. I do not know of any decent tuner that has ever tuned a theoretical ET. On the other hand, I know of many who have tuned a temperament octave between 4:2 and 6:3, and expanded this temperament along the principles of equal-beating 12ths and 15ths. This I think would be quite the same as your CHAS, and I think it is implemented every day, all around the world. Without the need for exclusiveness.

...“And, oh, I really think you should stop dissecting paragraphs, (and even sentences!) to make your case. Soon you will be down to single words, and then you can debate almost anything. It won't be in context, though, and that makes your counter-arguments pretty much worthless.Respect us other posters when you quote, please.”...

Patrick, you could have replied my previous post, you could have explained more in depth what you really mean when you talk about color, enhancement, emotions, ET's etc., but you prefer to post about an issue that I cannot take seriously.

You had written: “I know quite a few musicians that wouldn't touch ET with a ten foot pole, when it comes to interpret music written for "colored keys" (like, for example, the WTC).”.

My reply: “Your conclusions about WTC and colored keys have the value of an arbitrary inference and I would really drop this kind of proof.”

Now you write:... “I do not speak of proof, I just made an observation.”...

Let's see your “observation”. For what I understand, you offer a fact ( “I know quite a few musicians that wouldn't touch ET...”), and you give for granted that some music was written for "colored keys", which is debatable, and you give for sure that WTC was written for "colored keys", which again is debatable.

For what I understand, by mentioning the musicians you know, you intended to prove what you could not prove nor support with arguments, namely 1. some music was written for "colored keys", 2. WTC was written for "colored keys", 3. we need “colored keys” for expressing “calm” or “springiness” or what ever emotion. So Patrick, you may start respecting yourself, yours was not an observation.

You also write:..."I have a big problem with you referring to ET as 12th root of 2 as the old way, and CHAS as the revelation. I do not know of any decent tuner that has ever tuned a theoretical ET. On the other hand, I know of many who have tuned a temperament octave between 4:2 and 6:3, and expanded this temperament along the principles of equal-beating 12ths and 15ths. This I think would be quite the same as your CHAS, and I think it is implemented every day, all around the world. Without the need for exclusiveness."

Your post may prove your ignorance about practical tuning and theory, which might not be bad “in se”, but you could read Chas threads and deduce what is “implemented every day”. In fact, theoretical and practical aspects have long been discussed, so today it is difficult (for me) to justify your ignorance.

What may really represent a revelation, what would be offensive here is your attempt to banalize Chas temperamental theory and tuning issues. This would be bad in that you'd try to impoverish my solid sharing. And it would be worse in that it would show (to me) how your own education is not favoring your intellectual attitude. This tendency of yours, together with your (usual) arrogance and (unusual) impudence, would leave no room for more words.

Joseph Kerman's comment:..."It is above all a work of the most violent jolts and contrasts, starting with Variation 1, an imposing, somewhat menacing march placed right after Diabelli’s speedy waltz. Later moments are sublime, tender, noble, uncanny, boisterous, raucous – clusters of variations of every kind, it seems, of every mood, character, tempo, velocity and texture."...